Comments for thebrokechurchmanhttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com
High Mass. Low Price.Wed, 14 Sep 2016 04:02:45 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/Comment on When they say they’re too tired, believe them. by Global Capitalism, Part 2: How Capitalism Killed American Christianity | gathering the stoneshttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/when-they-say-theyre-too-tired-believe-them/comment-page-1/#comment-81
Wed, 14 Sep 2016 04:02:45 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=123#comment-81[…] is killing Christianity. When a seminary friend first suggested this theory to me a year ago, I thought it was overblown. I have no affinity for capitalism as an economic […]

]]>Comment on UnAnglican: How GAFCON’s Ecclesiology is Breaking the Communion. by Some Further Thoughts on Politics, Primates, and Problems | Drew Downshttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/unanglican-how-gafcons-ecclesiology-is-breaking-the-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-70
Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:04:28 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=151#comment-70[…] evidence that GAFCON can’t be trusted is found in threats against the system, convincing parts of the Communion to act outside the […]

]]>Comment on UnAnglican: How GAFCON’s Ecclesiology is Breaking the Communion. by Drew Downshttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/unanglican-how-gafcons-ecclesiology-is-breaking-the-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-69
Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:35:41 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=151#comment-69Yes! Yes! Yes! You have thoroughly grounded what I only intuited. Thank you!

]]>Comment on Why The Filioque Doesn’t Suck, A Respectful Response. by Georgehttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2015/10/14/why-the-filioque-doesnt-suck-a-respectful-response/comment-page-1/#comment-50
Sat, 17 Oct 2015 13:34:50 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=144#comment-50Dear Fr Michael, I don’t like to be subjective, but please allow me to be so for this time, for the sake of the topic. I originally come from an Eastern Orthodox Church, I now belong to the Union of Utrecht (Old Catholics), and whenever I attend an Anglican/Episcopal Mass, I have to cough when the creed is recited, because of that damned filioque.

I also have a great devotion to Saint Anselm, but I feel he was very wrong in supporting filioque. Saints and doctors of the Church were not perfect, even in matters of faith.

Yet I still wonder why it took so many years to the American Episcopalians to think about dropping the filioque. Don’t think it in pragmatic terms (we have to drop it because of hopes of full communion with this or that). Just for the sake of the TRUTH.

Now I don’t care of the good intentions the filioque had in its times. There were lots of bad choices for the sake of a higher good. For example, the holding of the chalice from the laity, or the baptism by one dip/pouring instead of three etc.

I am so glad that the filioque was removed all over the Union of Utrecht.

Ultimately, filioque is an insult towards the very text of the Gospel according to John. To still use the filioque, it’s as if you went on cursing every day, with the excuse that it had become your second nature. Get over it!

]]>Comment on Why The Filioque Doesn’t Suck, A Respectful Response. by Géo McLarneyhttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2015/10/14/why-the-filioque-doesnt-suck-a-respectful-response/comment-page-1/#comment-49
Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:47:05 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=144#comment-49Well, for one thing, the Creed hasn’t “always been a principally liturgical document” – in fact, the liturgical recitation of the Creed was historically one of the last elements of the Mass to be added. Being of a somewhat mediæval religious temperament myself, I certainly also find reflexive writing off of the era tedious, so I wouldn’t dismiss the filioque because of its vintage.

Actually, I think it makes good theological sense. To deny the filioque would, I fear, hover too close to subordinationism for my comfort. After all, that which we confess of the Father, so too of the Son. Some Orthodox theology makes the Father the “fount of divinity” in a way that seems to me to elevate him to the “really godly God” from whom the other two Persons derive their divinity. The filioque is, as you say, a “good faith” corrective to that. It just isn’t part of the creed itself, and I don’t think the text of liturgy is the place to insert devotional addenda to a statement which is, after all, supposed to be a profession of our catholicity. Allowing “local variation” would seem to undercut that purpose

How many other “good faith” correctives to the surrounding theological culture could we envisage? What clauses should North Americans be permitted to interpolate into the liturgical recitation of the creed in order to combat “TMD”? At what point does it cease to be a “catholic” text shared with the whole church? (The Apostles’ and Athanasian Creeds already do not fit that bill).

I find L.T. Johnson’s treatment of the controversy in his book on The Creed to be very measured. While he says the addition “overstepped what humans strictly can say about the inner life of God”, he finds it to be “fully in tune with the scriptural testimony taken as a whole” and is “not displeased to recite the creed with my community with those words included.”

]]>Comment on When they say they’re too tired, believe them. by hillarywatsonhttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/when-they-say-theyre-too-tired-believe-them/comment-page-1/#comment-42
Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:54:27 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=123#comment-42This is an interesting analysis. I don’t buy all of it, but the premise is solid. On a quick count, I could think of 5 people in my (medium-sized, middle class) congregation whose ability to be active in church life on Sundays is compromised by work commitments. The question, then, is “What are we to do?” Do we respond as a pastoral care issue? As an ecclesiological issue? As a justice issue? Are we equipped to do multi-faceted responses or are we spread too thin? Are you advocating for less of a church-on-Sunday approach? Or is this a call to mobilize congregations for political activism? What are ways you respond as a pastor?

What I’m saying is, if you could just outline a 5-point response, it would set me up very nicely for the next year of my ministry.

]]>Comment on For us, there is only the trying. by AAKhttps://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/for-us-there-is-only-the-trying/comment-page-1/#comment-31
Mon, 17 Aug 2015 14:28:43 +0000http://thebrokechurchman.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-31This is an EXCELLENT point, and very well said to boot.